Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| WikiProject Russia | (Rated Project-Class) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
This WikiProject's subject is featured in the Outline of Russia, which is incomplete and needs further development. That page, along with the other outlines on Wikipedia, comprise Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which also serves as the table of contents or site map of Wikipedia. |
[edit] Russian Ground Forces
Russian Ground Forces has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parrot of Doom (talk • contribs)
[edit] Assessments heads-up
Just a heads-up to folks who are doing assessments—when assessing/re-assessing articles, please spell out the banner name completely (i.e., use {{WikiProject Russia}}, not {{WPRUSSIA}} or any other shortcuts). The reason for that is the new {{ArticleAlertbotSubscription}} service available to WikiProjects—it watches the articles pertaining to the WikiProjects based on the banner which the articles are tagged with, but, unfortunately, it does not work with the redirects to the main banner. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:53, February 24, 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
[edit] Things we can do
Could some of the members of our numerous membership base please comment at Portal talk:Russia/Things you can do regarding how the "what you can do" banner situated at the top of this very page should be treated? Should we just worship it or is anyone planning on actually putting it to some use? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:01, March 30, 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Infobox practices and original research
There is a discussion going on at Template talk:Infobox Russian federal city regarding whether determining the elevation of a city via Google Earth is considered original research, and whether poorly-definable figures such as metro area/population should be included in the infoboxes at all. Additional input there would most certainly be appreciated.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:48, May 6, 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Sofia Rotaru
For those interested, please see the talk page. Someone is trying to delete portions of the article.--Rubikonchik (talk) 21:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Enikeev
This article is up on AFD and we could use some experts to determine if it meets inclusion criteria. - Mgm|(talk) 09:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Dear web brigades
You're falling behind. An anonymous editor's insertion of "bloody Putin's regime" has stood for almost three days in the article about racism in Russia. I only noticed and reverted it a few minutes ago.
Please take care of such elementary stuff as vandalism patrol instead of just editwarring on popular topics. I know, I know, vandalism patrol is mindnumbingly boring -- but it's a necessary evil in Wikipedia. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 21:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and I almost forgot: somebody's got to go over Special:Contributions/213.80.170.74, which appears to contain other similar edits. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 21:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- The Wikipedia department of the KGB issues its formal thanks. It's probably this guy. He seems to wander about randomly inserting this kind of stuff as a manifestation of an acute allergy to the Plague, which he appears to have caught himself in the process. Sad. --Illythr (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Lost in translation ... Heritage registers
We have a
- Russian: Единый государственный реестр объектов культурного наследия РФ [1], with >100,000 properties listed and some 50,000 more regional titles waiting for inclusion;
- and also a far smaller and different ru:Государственный свод особо ценных объектов культурного наследия народов Российской Федерации, which includes both properties and living institutions (theatres, libraries etc.).
What will be a correct, unambiguous English translation for both of these terms (both appear in the same article on #1). NVO (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- I would use the following:
- Unified State Registry of the Cultural Heritage Objects
- State Code [or Statute] of Critically Valuable Cultural Heritage Objects of the Peoples of the Russian Federation
- ...but these are, of course, not official translations.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:51, May 15, 2009 (UTC)
-
- You're right on mark with the second; Council of Europe compendium translates it as "State Code of Particularly Valuable Objects of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation" [2]. But to me code sounds misleading, especially when Russian Tax Code and Civil Code appear in the same section. NVO (talk) 06:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'd prefer "register" for свод, as a nod to the National Register of Historic Places. This is somewhat less ambiguous. --Ghirla-трёп- 08:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- Probably so, but единый реестр is far closer to NRHP than свод. And if свод is register, then what is реестр? I'd rather avoid having registry and register in one paragraph. NVO (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'd prefer "register" for свод, as a nod to the National Register of Historic Places. This is somewhat less ambiguous. --Ghirla-трёп- 08:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- You're right on mark with the second; Council of Europe compendium translates it as "State Code of Particularly Valuable Objects of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation" [2]. But to me code sounds misleading, especially when Russian Tax Code and Civil Code appear in the same section. NVO (talk) 06:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
-
[edit] Alexander Lebedev article
Was reading the [Alexander Lebedev] article and realized the whole biography section is basically copied from his website. Does this not raise some copyright issues? (I'm new to Wikipedia so haven't quite got my head round everything yet!) Hoezo (talk) 19:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Hoezo, and welcome to WP. You are correct that text which is copied does raise copyright issues, as per WP:COPYVIO. Under that policy you are able to remove without question anything which is copied from a source which isn't released under a free licence. As Lebedev's website doesn't state that content is licenced under a free licence, and also because of the clear copyright notice, much of the text in his article is a copyright violation and I have removed it based upon that policy. I also noticed that you removed material from the talk page of that article, and it is a good removal; you may want to note the WP:BLP policy, for the removal of the comments on the talk page by yourself not only removed information which isn't relevant to the article and its improvement, but also removed a clear violation of the WP:BLP policy. You are going good so far, and if you have any questions relating to policies, and the like, feel free to post any questions here, we're all here to help new editors. Cheers, --Russavia Dialogue 05:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Proposal for a 200-WikiProject contest
A proposal has been posted for a contest between all 200 country WikiProjects. We're looking for judges, coordinators, ideas, and feedback.
The Transhumanist 00:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Please help with new template
please help enhance this template:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash sul (talk • contribs)
- I think that dumping two empires and present-day state in one bunch is incorrect. And if it's done, how deep should it go into primordial time - Kulikovo field? Deeper? Also: the first entry in the list, Kościuszko Uprising, is clearly not an "internal affair". Also: putting together Civil War and Yazov's putsch onto one line is, well, listcruft. Any idea how to separate major wars from three-day conflicts? NVO (talk) 02:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
-
- By using categories instead of templates. What is the point of this template anyway? It sure does not aide navigation, no matter how you move stuff around. And why does the "Russian Armed Forces" link in the title lead to history of Russia?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:33, May 20, 2009 (UTC)
[edit] GA Sweeps invitation
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] FAR National Anthem of Russia
I have nominated National Anthem of Russia for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. OboeCrack (talk) 17:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Maps needed
Most of the articles on oblasts, cities, towns etc. lack maps to show where they are, and to bring out the local geography. Without that geography, their history loses something, and they are less useful to non-Russian readers. Unless you know where Rzhev is, and how it relates to the Volga and surrounding country, you lose value. I have no facility to add maps, so I can't help. Michael of Lucan (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- I hope you don't think we are keeping the maps to ourselves in hopes to keep all those places secret, eh? :) Whenever there is a map, it is added to appropriate places. If you know of a map that hasn't been added to appropriate places, that's obviously an oversight that needs to be fixed—you are welcome to point such cases out. In the meanwhile, the popup feature of the coordinates service is the place to go.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:42, May 26, 2009 (UTC)
- I made my comment because these articles appear in the English language version of Wikipedia. So, you cannot assume that readers have any knowledge of Russia. Even people who go there as tourists usually see only Saint Petersburg or Moscow. I have been to Western Russia (mainly the Riga road and Rzhev area) many years ago, and remember it with interest and pleasure. However, when I read articles about the area, I get no sense of the geography of the place. The articles deal more with the history, which is interesting too of course. The picture of Rzhev is almost a century old, from before the Revolution, although it does show the relationship with the Volga. (BTW, the Zubtsov war memorial told me more about the War against Hitler than any history book. Maybe a good article to be written.) Michael of Lucan (talk) 11:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Providence Bay , Siberia. (Russian Provideniya) and English place names on the Siberian coast
There were a lot of Americans and other English speakers active on the Siberian coast in the 19th and early 20th centuries. They gave English names to places, sometimes in advance of Russian names. These are now mostly gone from modern maps, which is confusing for someone reading history. I spent some time sorting out Emma Harbor, Providence Bay, and Plover Bay, and wrote a short article Providence Bay, Siberia summarizing what I learned. Using the English version as the title appears to violate the naming guideline. I have a couple concerns. If the article needs to be renamed, I'd like to get it right the first time. That means I need an authoritative Russian name and some help with the transliteration, or an official transliteration. More broadly, is there an efficient way to handle these English place names or could one be developed? I'm thinking of something as simple as a list. Any help appreciated.Dankarl (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- The story matches Russian books, apart from minor detail, but there's another side to it, i.e. in the same 1881 when "the revenue cutter Corwin took on coal at Plover Bay" Strelok, a Russian military steam corvette, was recording coastline and depths near Providenia (they reached Providenia July 27 and stayed in the area until late August, incidentally meeting American USS Rodgers (1879) and SS Handy) [3] quite a lot of ships, even more shipwrecsks ... Hey! put that coal back! oh well, we all see our side of history. NVO (talk) 15:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
-
- I was wondering about that. Looks like US Revenue Cutters called (and coaled?) at Providini[y]a Bay regularly, Corwin certainly more than once in 1881, I have not chased down the other references. I presume this was by some sort of arrangement. But did Russia have someone there to stop every steam whaler in the Pacific from coaling, or at least to keep track of their bill?
-
- Do I take it from your use that Providenia, not Provideniya is the authoritative transliteration?Dankarl (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- US govt sources list Provideniya Bay
FAA example, keep it.Done, added Webster dictionary ref. NVO (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC) - I recommend renaming to remove Siberia from the title. Far Eastern coastline is definitely not Siberia (see this article discussing the borderline issue). Providence Bay slot is empty, why not? NVO (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- US govt sources list Provideniya Bay
- Could I get you to put the Strelok visit into the article? Since I don't read Russian I can't read your source. Thanks Dankarl (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- Do I take it from your use that Providenia, not Provideniya is the authoritative transliteration?Dankarl (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Discussion continues at Providence Bay, Siberia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dankarl (talk • contribs) 16:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Nomination for an article to be part of Wiki:Project Russia
I have noticed that this article is part of Wiki:Project Russia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Russians
So I thought why not this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_of_ethnic_minorities_in_Estonia
Russians are the biggest ethnic minority in Estonia. The article looks promising and is well cited. I see no reason not to make it a part of Wiki:Project Russia.
Alas it is also being nominated for deletion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Discrimination_of_ethnic_minorities_in_Estonia
Personally I want to give this article a chance, and maybe including it in Wiki:Project Russia will give it that chance. Maybe not, but I figured it's worth a shot, what do you guys think? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, there is no need to nominate articles for project inclusion (we neither have a nomination/approval process in place, nor really need one). If you think an article should be covered by WP:RUSSIA (and, AfD issues aside, the one you mentioned does belong), just tag the talk page with {{WikiProject Russia}} and that's that. If you want to assess the article in the process, that's great, if not, that's OK, too—someone will get to it eventually. If anyone ever disagrees with your inclusion/assessment, the matter can be re-visited then.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:37, June 2, 2009 (UTC)
-
- What I am pointing out here, is that a potential WikiProject:Russia article is about to be DELETED, and I would like to get the opinions of the members of WikiProject:Russia as to whether this article should be deleted or not. In addition having members in this group assess the project's quality would be great! I think the article has great potential, and is well sourced, but when the other side would rather delete it then debate, I come here to seek advice from fellow Wiki editors of WikiProject:Russia. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Back cover does not matter. Front cover templates do not matter either. What matters is: who has the loudest mouth and the baddest gang besides them. Yes, sysops do check contents and weigh the arguments but they don't go against the pack either. These articles have a solid pro-deletion record; case, as I see it, is lost, waste of time. NVO (talk) 13:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- What I am pointing out here, is that a potential WikiProject:Russia article is about to be DELETED, and I would like to get the opinions of the members of WikiProject:Russia as to whether this article should be deleted or not. In addition having members in this group assess the project's quality would be great! I think the article has great potential, and is well sourced, but when the other side would rather delete it then debate, I come here to seek advice from fellow Wiki editors of WikiProject:Russia. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
There has been a number of Russia related articles with nationalistic/political accusations and/or other POV agenda. Typically, these articles were created by one gang and soon after creation nominated for deletion by the opposite gang. On a typical AfD one side claims notability and media coverage, the other non-notability and POV issues. The result of the AfD was typically no consensus, and the articles were kept, and POV wars started over the titles and content, as well as merging/moving. Personally, I do not care much about this particular article, although I predict the result would be no consensus rather than delete. Even if this particular article does get deleted, it does not stop there, there is a bigger picture of an apparent battleground on WP related to Easter Europe/Russia/Soviet Union/communism. It is clearly not the right way to write articles on Wikipedia, even though WP became known for pushing POVs rather than creating an encyclopedia, which probably frustrates most contributors. I remember there was a proposal, I think by Miacek, to create a Wikiproject (or sub-project) to address these issues. What do you think about that? (Igny (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC))
[edit] Another Vote for article renaming for the 2008 South Ossetia War article
Yup folks, some users are trying rename this article yet again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2008_South_Ossetia_war#Requested_move
Same arguments, same story. Also, so that I don't get accused of "canvassing" this time, can someone else ask others who edited that talkpage to comment and/or vote. Thank you! HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Nizhny Novgorod oblast --> Nizhni Novgorod oblast
Please help me change "Nizhny Novgorod oblast" to "Nizhni Novgorod oblast" regarding The Constitution of Russia (http://kremlin.ru/eng/articles/ConstEng3.shtml). There hundreds of articles with errors in name or content. nejron (talk) 08:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have moved the article back. "Nizhny Novgorod Oblast" spelling is supported by the WP:UE and WP:RUS guidelines and is correct. "Nizhni Novgorod oblast" is not incorrect, but it is not the variant recommended by our guidelines.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:11, June 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Why? It's in The Constitution of Russia (http://kremlin.ru/eng/articles/ConstEng3.shtml). I think The Constitution is the most important source. nejron (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- The Constitution of Russia, in Russian, is indeed a very important source. Its translations, however, depend very much on the preferences of translators and the guidelines of the agencies for whose purposes the translations are being done. If you consider Wikipedia as being one of such agencies, you should take into consideration the rules applicable to this kind of translation, which, in this case, are WP:UE and WP:RUS. We use "Nizhny", not "Nizhni" because of WP:RUS, we use "oblast" and not, say, "region" because our guidelines call for use of exact terminology (we are, after all, an encyclopedia), and we capitalize "Oblast" because this is the general approach taken by our naming conventions.
- All in all, you can't single out just one source (no matter how good it is) and use it as the reason for doing something, especially if that something is not supporting the facts, but rather representing an arbitrary choice of formatting. With hundreds of different ways of doing any given thing, we have to standardize on something. From the encyclopedia point of view, WP:UE and BGN/PCGN-based romanization guidelines make a lot more sense than relying on whatever random choice one branch of government decided to use on its website. Hope this helps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:35, June 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Why? It's in The Constitution of Russia (http://kremlin.ru/eng/articles/ConstEng3.shtml). I think The Constitution is the most important source. nejron (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed Renaming of 2008 South Ossetia war
Hey everyone! I know that (HistoricWarrior007 has already brought this proposed renaming up on this page already, but I'd like to do so again in a more neutral manner.
Currently, there is a discussion underway at Talk:2008 South Ossetia war#Requested move about a renaming of the article from its current name ("2008 South Ossetia war") to "Russia-Georgia war" or "Russian-Georgian war". This discussion seems to be spending literally more space on Russia's war guilt, or absence thereof, than what English-speakers actually call this war!
A similar discussion already occurred about two to three months ago, during which an extraordinarily slim majority of users (the final tally was 24-23, although one user voted for both sides and the deciding vote was cast after the survey had been concluded for several hours) defeated the proposed renaming. However, the renaming proposal was brought back up, as some individuals feel that a new consensus has appeared.
I hope that the input from this project will help get the discussion back on track, so that the improvement of this article, which our project considers to be of Top Importance, will swiftly continue. And personally, I don't really care what we call the war, as long as we consider our readers in the process. Thank you, and happy editing! Laurinavicius (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] GA Reassessment of Erast Fandorin
I am conducting a reassessment as part of the GA sweeps process. I have found come concerns which need addressing if this article is to keep its GA status, which may be found at Talk:Erast Fandorin/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Belarusian/Russian spelling
User:Geregen2 is going around to every Belarusian article and changing the spelling to what he calls to "Belarusian spelling". Check out his edit history: [4] . Just in the past day he has probably moved a hundred articles to his "Belarusian spelling". Most Belarusian websites I've visited are in Russian. UEFA uses the Russian spelling for Belarusian footballers. For example, Sergei Kislyak is spelled as Sergei Kislyak according to UEFA (link here for proof = [5]), but User:Geregen2 moved the WP article to Syarhey Kislyak anyway. Is there any way we can annul his edits without having to go through tediously one by one? He's literally spent 6 straight hours just moving articles. I think he may be a bot. --Tocino 17:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, he's not a bot, he's just a very prolific editor. Regarding the matter, I am not quite sure what it has to do with WP:RUSSIA. How the names of Belarusian athletes (or, indeed, not just athletes) are romanized is a matter of guidelines which should be developed by WP:BELARUS. For Russian names, we have WP:RUS, which, if the problem concerned people from Russia, would favor your approach (i.e., that the variant predominantly used in English takes priority), but for Belarusian all we have is WP:CYR#Belarusian, which doesn't exactly address the issue. I see you have posted this inquiry to WP:BELARUS as well; I trust it is them who should be responding to this. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:55, June 25, 2009 (UTC)
- WP:BELARUS is not very active, so that's why I posted on here as well. --Tocino 18:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, if you need advice, I can recommend you to first and formost contact the user in question and let him know that you have a problem with his edits. Point out that many of his moves are in contradiction with WP:UE; show some examples. How it goes from there depends pretty much on how your communication develops. I would still think that polishing the nuances of WP:UE/WP:CYR#Belarusian divide are best left to the WP:BELARUS folks, but if they aren't very active, here's your chance to discuss setting some standards so this situation does not repeat in the future. My personal opinion—the moves, from what I see, do not conform with WP:UE and should be reverted, but each case still needs to be looked at individually. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:48, June 25, 2009 (UTC)
- WP:BELARUS is not very active, so that's why I posted on here as well. --Tocino 18:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Dnepropetrovsk maniacs
Could someone help with this on the translation? Thanks, --♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Ruff
Hello all, in an attempt to address any English bias, I would be very grateful if any Russian-speaking person knew of or could find any folklore, or history of hunting or, or any other information on, the Ruff in their native country which might not be covered in the article currently at FAC. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Gazprom
Hi, I'm interested in improving the article Gazprom. Does anyone have any improvement suggestions? There isn't a lot going on on the article talk page, so please tell me what you think. Offliner (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
